Generalized Small-Signal Dynamical Modeling

of Multi-Port Dc-Dc Converters

David C. 13amill

School of Electronic Engineering, Information Technology and Mathematics

University of Surrey,GuildfordGU25XH, United Kingdom
D. Hamill@surrey.ac.uk

Abstract — A general method is presented for modeling multi- voltage to constant current, or be nonlinear, so a linear re-
port de-de converters. It copes with multiple inputs, multiple sistive load is a special case. With other loads, the small-
outputs and bidirectional ports, and is based on an averaging signal damping will difler from that predicted using an
formulation. A matrix description is adopted, so the technique equivalent load resistance. Worse, the load could be induc-
can be extended to converters with any number of ports. As an
tive or capacitive, and this will greatly affect the overall
example, a three-port forward-flyback converter is analyzed
system dynamics. For these cases, models developed using a
using symbolic computation software (Maple V).
stiff voltage source and a resistive load will give misleading
results. Instead, the aim should be to model the converter in
isolation from its surrounding circuit. Provided its terminal
I. INTRODUCTION
characteristics are properly represented, such a model can

c
ompared with the attention paid to two-port conver- subsequently be embedded within a complete power system,
ters, little consideration has been given to modeling allowing the interactions to be assessed with ease. This is the
multi-output de-de converters. Important characteris- basis of two-port circuit theory, adapted here to multiple
tics such as static and dynamic cross regulation have been ports.
little explored in the literature, and then usually only on an First, a generalized model of an open loop de-de converter
ad-hoc basis — e.g. [1], [2]. Furthermore, very little work is developed, assuming an averaged description. Next, the
has been done on generalized multi-port de-de converters. characteristics are linearized around a quiescent operating
For example, a personal computer power supply could com- point. Finally, the open loop model is embedded within a
prise a single converter with multiple dc outputs as usual, feedback control loop. The method is subject to the usual
but two dc inputs: one fed from rectitied ac mains, the other limitation of linear models: it may be inaccurate for large
from a secondary battery. The battery port could be bidirec- signals. Nevertheless, linearized average models have proved
tional, to allow recharging. A generalized de-de converter popular with engineers because they allow the application of
can have multiple input ports, multiple output ports and standard linear systems control theory.
bidirectional ports.
This paper describes a general method for small-signal II. THE OPEN LOOP CONVERTER
modeling of any multi-port de-de converter. It is based on
A de-de converter has two or more power ports. If power
matrices, for several reasons: they provide a compact nota-
always flows into the converter it is an input por~ if power
tion; the results can be applied to converters with any num-
always flows out, it is an output por~ if power can flow in
ber of ports; numerical matrix computations are easily
either direction, it is bidirectional. However, for generality,
programmed using standard linear algebra packages, work-
the standard circuit-theory sign convention is adopted here:
sheets such as MathCad, and even spreadsheets; and matrix
the reference direction of current is into the positive terminal
algebra can be automated with symbolic computation pack-
of each port, as shown in Fig. 1. No distinction is made
ages such as Maple, Mathematical and Macsyma.
between input and output ports; if the power at a port is
Most analyses of two-port de-de converters start by assum- positive, it is acting as an inpuq if negative, as an output.
ing a stiff voltage source at the input and a resistive load at
the output. For good reasons the proposed approach does not. A. The State Vector
At its input, a converter is often fed from a filter, or at least The model presented is based on four essential vectors, the
via some line impedance decoupled by a capacitor. At the first of which is the state vector x(t). A general description of
output, the load’s dc characteristic many vary from constant a dynamical system is:

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE

 ‘1 ‘N
+~ ~+

VI ‘Iv
where + distinguishes a particular system. The dynamics of
—
an nrth-order converter can be characterized by m internal
de-de
state variables, usually the inductor currents and capacitor ‘2 ‘N–1
+~ converter ~+
voltages. These state variables can be formed into an instan-
“2 ‘N–1
taneous state vector, x,~l(t) ● ll?~. This gives an exact de-
—
scription of the time varying, nonlinear circuit including, for
example, ripple at the switching frequency.
0
In most converters, some components of the state vector m
e
will be “fast” (comparable to the switching frequency) and
other ports
others will be “slow”. In many cases the model can be sim-
plified by overlooking the fast variables. A suitable process Fig. 1: Generalized multi-port de-de converter, showing
converts the time varying mth order model into a time in- reference directions of current and voltage.
variant rzth order one, n < m. The instantaneous state vector
x,.$,(t) e RY is changed into an equivalent “low frequency” independent variable — the battery’s voltage is independent
state vector x(t) e R“. of the converter and changes according to the state of charge.
Moving to the input port, the supply is usually approximated
Two approaches for eliminating the fast variables are
by a variable voltage source, so voltage should be chosen as
sampling and averaging. In the first, x,.,,(t) is sampled at the
the independent variable, with the converter’s input current
switching frequency J, and the fast variables are neglected.
as the dependent variable. In control system terminology, the
(Though not attempted here, the method presented could be
components of w are disturbances to the system, whale the
adapted to a sampled data description.) Alternatively, any of
components of y represent its response.
the averaging methods developed for two-port converters can
in principle be used to obtain x(t). These include the original A very common situation, termed here the Ordinary Case,
circuit averaging process [3], state space averaging [4], is when the converter has a single input port and N – 1 out-
injected-absorbed currents [5], the PWM switch model [6], put ports. For this case the independent vector w best con-
Bogoliubov averaging [7], and switching-frequency depen- sists of the input voltage and the output currents, while the
dent averaging [8]. Of particular interest are symbolic com- dependent vector y comprises the input current and the out-
putational methods [9], Discussion of the pros and cons of put voltages.
particular averaging processes is outside the scope of this
C. The Control Vector
papeq it is assumed that some satisfactory process exists for
mapping X,ml(f) to x(f), and that the dynamics of the conver- Let the converter have M control variables. For example,
ter are adequately described by the result. these might include signals that determine the duty ratio or
frequency of a switching device, or control magnetic amplifi-
B. The Port Vectors ers. The control signals form a vector u(f) e lR”.
Suppose the de-de converter has N power ports. The port It might be thought that if M’ = N all the dependent vari-
currents i, and voltages v,, r = 1 ... N, comprise a set of 2N ables of y could be individually controlled by u. This is not
port variables. For each port we choose either i, or v, and necessarily so. In an ideal lossless converter, with the sign
form the chosen quantities into a vector of independent vari-
convention adopted the total power entering the converter
ables, w(t) G RN. The remaining quantities are then formed must be zero. This removes one degree of freedom, so only
into a vector of dependent variables, y(t) e E%N. N – 1 components of y can be controlled by u.
There are many ways in which the port variables can be Often, M < N – 1; then it is impossible to control more
assigned to the two vectors, some of which are more helpful than M dependent variables, and the rest must rely upon
than others. For each pofi it must be decided which variable, cross regulation. If the converter is allowed losses, the total
i or v, is to be regarded as the independent one. For instance, power entering the converter is no longer constrained to
if the converter is designed to deliver a constant voltage to a zero: it is positive and equal to the losses. Now all N depen-
load, the output port’s current should be taken as the inde- dent variables can be individually controlled, for instance by
pendent variable, because the load, not the converter, deter- including linear regulators in the converter. (This adversely
mines the current drawn. The current is independent of the affects efficiency.) In the Ordinary Case it is only necessary
converter so it should be the independent variable. Converse- to control the N – 1 output ports, while the input current
ly, if the converter is meant to deliver a constant current, e.g. goes where it must.
as a battery charger. the load voltage should be taken as the

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE

D. Large-Signal Model loop stability, the converter will settle to a steady state where
The open loop converter can be characterized by two non- x(t) = const = X and y(t) = const = Y. Substituting for u, w,

linear vector equations linking the essential vectors u, w, x x and y in (2) and (3), and setting dX/dt = O (since X =

and y: const), X maybe found in terms of U, W and Y. This gives

the steady state operating point, Q = {U, W, X, Y}.
$ x(t)= (#)[x(t), u(t), w(t)] (2) Now consider small perturbations around Q. Adapting the
usual notation for de-de converters to the vector case, let
x(t) = X-t ~(t) , etc., where i(t)is a small perturbation from
y(t) = ~[x(f), u(t), w(t)] (3)
the steady state equilibrium. Provided they are smooth, the
The state equation, (2), governs the converter’s large-signal nonlinear fimctions 1$ and v may each be expanded by a
dynamics as it reacts to the control signals and independent multivariable Taylor series; truncating after the linear terms,
port variables. Equation (3), the response equation Uoutput (2) and (3) become
equation” in control terms), describes how the dependent
port variables respond. Functions + and v are attributes of a : i(t)= A i(t)+ B ii(t)
+ E ti(f) (4)
particular converter.

E. Linearization j(t)= C i(t)+ D i(t) + Fti(t) (5)

We next find the steady state. Let u(t)= const = U (i.e. the where A, B, C, D, E and F are real, constant matrices:
control signals are held steady) and w(t) = const = W (i.e.
the independent variables are dc quantities). Assuming open

TASLE I NOMENCZ.ATTJRIFORTHEGENERALIZSDMODEL

SCALARS:

?1 dimension of the averageddynamical system

M number of control signals Here the Jth entry of the sensitivity matrix Z3$/i3xis @,/dx,,
etc. Equations (4) and (5), valid for small perturbations only,
Iv number of ports
are an augmented version of the standard state space descrip-
VECTORS tion of a multivariable linear system. Fig. 2 shows the equa-
ii(s) (M x 1) small-signal control vector* tions as a block schematic. The notation follows that of [10]:
matrices A, B, C and D have their usual linear-systems
*(S) (N x I) small-signal independent port vector *
meaning. Of particular importance is the system matrix A,
i(s) (n x 1) small-signal state vector * whose eigenvalues govern the dynamics. Matrices E and F
;(s) (N x 1) small-signal dependent port vector * represent direct feed-through of disturbances.

4 (n x 1) RHS of the state equation 1? Open Loop Small-Signal Model

v (N x 1) RHS of the responseequation Taking Laplace transforms, (4) and (5) become
* x is a large-signalquantity,i is a small-sigualquautity
s~(s) = A i(s) + B ii(s) + E +(s) (7)

~(s) = C ~(.s) + Dii(s) + Fti(.s) (8)

where, with some abuse of notation, @ is to be understood

as the Laplace transform of ~(f), etc. Finding i(s) from (7)
and substituting into (8) yields the open loop small-signal
model:

F (Nx N) @l&v ~
G(s) (N x N) closed loop port-to-port transfer function matrix j(s) = H(s) ii(s) + J(s) +(s) (a)
H(s) (N x M) open loop control-t~port tmnsfer function matrix (9)
J(s) (N x N) open loop port-to-port transfm timction matrix where H(s) = C(SI – A)”-l B + D (b)
and J(s) = C(SI – A)-l E + F (c)
K(s) (M XN) controller matrix
t emluatedattheoperatingpoint

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE

 (i(s)
J
B D :(s) E H(s)
+-
+
+- 2(s) > ;(s)
> f(s)

$ (s] E J(s) +
E + F

6’(s) ? ?“
Fig. 2: Block schematic of the open loop small-signal Fig. 3: The model of Fig. 2 may be reduced to two
model of a de-de converter. frequency dependent blocks and an adder.

2N port variables, there are (2N) !/(2N! ) possible combina-

(I is the N x N identity matr)ix. In (9a) the internal state
tions, excluding row swaps. This number determines the
vector ;(s) has been eliminated and the constant matrices A
different forms of matrix G. (E.g. there are six varieties of
to F have been replaced by frequency dependent matrices.
two-port parameters, but 60 varieties of three-port parame-
Equation (9a) isshown in block schematic form in Fig. 3,a
ters.) In the analysis of large multi-port networks, the usual
complete “black box” small-signal model of a generalized
choice is to group all the currents into one vector and all the
open loop N-port de-de converter. The entries of the N x M
voltages into the other. Depending on which vector is chosen
matrix H(s) aretransfer functions from thek.f control signals
as independent, the resulting matrix contains either im-
to the Ndependent port variables. and the entries of the NX
pedances (z-parameters) or admittances (y-parameters).
Nmatrix J(s)are transfer fanctions from theNindependent
However, these are not very useful for the present purposes,
portvariablesto the Ndependentport variables.
because the y and z-parameters for an ideal converter are all
infinite.
III. THECLOSEDLOOPCONVERTER
The two-port g-parameters have been suggested by Mand-
Anobjective ofa de-de converter isto regulate against
hana [11] as a small-signal model for de-de converters:
disturbances: tomaintain certain components of y constant
despite variations in w. Ideally, ~(s)=O. This goal is ap-
proachedby applying closed loop control. In the feedback
system of Fig. 4, ~(s) iscompared tozeroto produce an error
vector, which is processed by controller K(s) to produce the where g,, is the converter’s input admittance, g,~ its reverse
control vector i(s), thus closing the loop: current gain, gzl its forward voltage gain, and gzj its output
impedance. This description can be extended to the Ordinary
ii(s) = –K(s) j(S) (lo) Case of a multi-port de-de converter if the port variables are
In general K(s) allows cross coupling, so that any component segregated into dependent and independent vectors as sug-
gested above, with port 1 taken as the input. Then (1 la) may
of y can influence any or all components of u. From (9) and
(10) the closed loop small-signal model is obtained: be written as

j(s) = G(s) ti(S) (a)

11:1
lZI=[AV(S)
:‘out(s)
(11)
where G(s) = [1 + H(s) K(s)]-’ J(s) (b)
I I

A condition for validity is that I + H(s)K(s) must be nonsin- Here ~(s) and *(s) have been partitioned into voltage and
gular, which is usually true. A block schematic is shown in current parts, and the matrix G(s) partitioned accordingly.
Fig. 5. Note that if K(s) = O, (1 la) reduces to G(s) = J(s). Scalar Y,.(s) = g,, =; 1/~ 1 is the converter’s input admittance.

A. The Ordinary Case

Row ve$tqr A,(;) : k,, ... glNl comprises reverse current
gains, ilhz . . . z1/iN , and describes how output current
The Ordinary Case is particularly important in practice.
changes affect the input. Column vector A,(s) = ~21 ... gm]~
When the N independent variables are chosen from a set of
comprises forward voltage gains ~ Jo 1 ~.. ~IV/~I It describes

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE

 Reference +
o
[

‘(S)*’(S)
Open loop converter
Fig. 5: The model of Fig, 4 can be reduced to a single
Fig. 4: Block schematic of the closed loop small-signal frequency dependent block, forming a small-signal “black
model ofadc-dc converter. box” model of a multi-port de-de converter.

how input voltage changes affect the output voltages, i.e. the discontinuous mode, so both the duty ratio and the switching
dynamic line regulation the of
converter frequency tiect its output voltage. For this example n = 5
(audiosusceptibility). Ideally all its entries would be zero. (state variables), N = 3 (ports) and h’ = 2 (control signals).
Matrix Zout(s)= ~g], i, j = 2.. .N, comprises self and mutual Let the four essential vectors be:
impedances ~,111
~ . The leading-diagonal elements (i =j) are
thesource impedances ofeach output port, and describe the State vector x = [i~l i~z vcr vcz va] ~
dynamic load regulation of the converter. The off-diagonal Independent port vector w = [vf iol im]T
terms (i #J) are mutual impedances relating the port-i cur- Dependent port vector y = [i, Vol va]T
rent to the port~” voltage, and describe the dynamic cross Control vector u = [a jy
regulation. Ideally all the entries of ZOU1(S)
would be zero.

For cases other than the Ordinary Case, different ways of where i~l is the current in L1, etc., 8 is the duty ratio andj is
choosing the independent and dependent variables might be the switching frequency. Other quantities are defined in Fig.
more appropriate, and they should be considered on their 6. The circuit has the following parameter values: L, =50~.
merits. L,= 600p.H, L, = 60pH, Cl = 47pF, C, = 470@, C, = 470@,
F.= 49kHz, A = 0.3, NJNP = 20/14, ~ = 28V, 101 = –1A, Io,
Thus the N x N transfer function matrix G(s) gives a com-
= –1A. The output voltages are intended to be VO1= 12V, V02
plete small-signal description of the dynamics of any N-port
= 12V.
de-de converter. For an open loop converter (with its control
signals held constant), G(s) is identical to J(s). For a closed The “low frequency” state equation may be found by a
loop converter under the control scheme shown, G(s) is naive averaging process as:
given by (1 la). Other forms of control (e.g. inner/outer
loops) will result in a different form for (1 lb).
(V1- vcl)/L1
(VC18N,11NP - v@Lz
IV. EWLE —
— (iLl - 6iLzN8~/NP - 82v1/2f,LP)lCl (14)
(i~z + zol )IC2
As an example, an Ordinary Case converter is analyzed
using the symbolic computation package Maple V [12]. The v~ti212LPfSvc3 i- io2, IC3
( ) J
method can easily be applied to more complicated conver-
ters, the computer handling the increased complexity of the which corresponds to the state equation (2). Likewise,
algebra.

I1!J
il iL]
A. Open Loop Model (15)
y = Vol = VC2,
The three-port converter shown in Fig. 6 [13] can be sepa- V02 VC3
rated into two “semi-converters”: it is basically a forward
corresponds to the response equation (3).
converter but, instead of the normal energy-recovery reset
winding, the transformer has a flyback winding. The forward The operating point is found by letting ill = 1~1, i~2 = I~j,
semi-converter operates in continuous mode, so its output vCl=Vcl, vc2=Va, vG=Vm, il=ll, vol=Vol, vm=Vm, v1
voltage depends on the duty ratio but is independent of the = VI, iol =Iol, im=Im, 6= A,~=F~, setting dXldt=O and
switching frequency. The flyback semi-converter operates in solving for X:

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE

 For space reasons only the 5 x 5 A matrix is shown here. B
is5x2, Cis3x5, Disthe3x 2zeromatrix, Eis 5x3,
and F is the 3 x 3 zero matrix.
*
I A A The H(s) and J(s) matrices are found by computing (10)
Forward (CCM) and (11) in Maple:
Hmat:-.. (Clnat&*inverse (s * &*() -Amat) &*Rnat+bt) ;
Jlllat:- —evalm(Cinat&*iwerse (s * &*() -Amat) &*13mt+Fmat) ;

H(s) is 3 x 2; J(s) is 5 x 5.

The full expressions for H(s) and J(s) are too complex to
reproduce here but, substituting numerical parameter values
and settings = O, their dc values are found as

~ 4.286 -0.875x 10-51

Fig. 6: Two-output forward-flyback converter used in the
example, H(0) = 40 0 (18)

[ 80 –2.45 X 10-4 1

0.0153 –0.4286 O
J(0) = 0.4286 0 0 (19)
IL1
IL2 [ 0.8571 0 12.00 1

x= v~, — (16) At other frequencies the entries will be complex numbers.

Columns 1 and 2 of H(0) indicate the effect of duty ratio

and switching frequency variations, while rows 1, 2 and 3
.
refer to the input current and the two output voltages. Thus,
for example, if the duty ratio is increased from 0.30 to 0.31,
Substituting numerical values for the parameters, the the input current will increase by 4.286 x 0.01 = 42.86mA,
operating point Q is found as the forward output voltage will increase by 40 x 0.01 =
400mV, and the flyback output voltage will increase by 80 x
U = [A FJ’ = [0.3 49 OOOHZ]’ (given) 0.01 = 800mV. If the switching frequency is increased from
W = [~ 101 ]@]’= [28V -1A -lA]’(given) 49 to 50kHz, the input current will decrease by 0.875 x 10-5
x 1000 = 8. 75mA, the forward output voltage will be unaf-
x = [~~1IL2 Vcl J’C2 VC31T
= [0.857A 1A 28V 12.OV 12.0VIT fected, and the flyback output voltage will decrease by 2.45 x
Y = [i, VO,vJ’ = [0.857A 12.OV 12.OVl’ 10-4 x 1000 = 245mV (all dc values).
Thejll = 0.0153 entry of J(0) means the incremental input
Matrices A through F are easily computed from their
conductance is 15 .3mS. The jlz = –0.4286 entry is the cur-
definitions in (6), by calling Maple’s jacobian fimction six
rent gain from the forward output current to the input cur-
times. For example, A = (@/ax)Q is found by
rent (negative because all currents are defined as flowing
j acobian (pbivec, xvec) : into the converter). Increasing the flyback output current
A := subs(Qset, “) ;
does not affect the input current, as shown byjl~ = O, due to
the open loop discontinuous mode operation. The voltage
which yields
gains from the input voltage to the two output voltages arejzl
= 0.4286 and j,] = 0.8571 (poor line regulation). The for-
ward output resistance is jzz = 0f2 (perfect load regulation),
while the flyback output resistance is j~t = 12f2 (poor load
regulation). The two mutual resistances jj~ = J“qz= Of2 mean
that this idealized converter has perfect cross regulation.
A= (17)
B. Closed Loop Model
01 00 0
E Suppose the loop is closed by adding a simple proportional
–2F.LPI;2 controller with no cross coupling:
00 00
V;A2C3

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE

 hrmwd As in [13], the duty ratio was employed to regulate the
0. forward semi-converter and the switching Iiequeney was
used for the flyback semi-converter. The two control loops
-20-
interact, see Fig. 7. For better results the loops should be
dEI decoupled; this will be discussed in a planned future paper.
-40-
The full Maple listing of this example is available from
-60- the author on request.

40- v. CONCLUSION
0 2000 4000 * 6000 8!300 10000
A technique has been presented for modeling a general-
Flyback
ized N-port converter, in isolation from its sources and loads.
-10- The starting point is an averaged large-signal state equation,
obtained by any applicable method. The outcome is a fidl
-20-
open loop model. This can be embedded within a control
-30- loop to give a complete small-signal dynamical model, G(s),
dB
-40-
for any multi-port de-de converter. The matrix formulation is
particularly suited to automatic computation, either numer-
+o-
ical or symbolic.
-so-

REFERENCES
-70-
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 [1] K. Haradq T. Nabeshima and K. Hisanag< “State-space analysn of the
f
cross-regulation”, Power Electromcs SpecmlWs Corf, San Diego, CA
June 1979, pp. 186-192
Fig. 7: Dynamic line regulation (audiosusceptibility) of the
example converter, m open loop and closed loop, [2] Y.T. Chen, D.Y Che~ Y.P. Wu and F.Y. St@ “Small-signal modeling
of multiple-output forward converters with current-mode control”, L%%?
Trans. on Power Electromcs, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 122-131, Jan. 1996
[3] G.W. Wester and R.D. Middlebrook, “Low-fi-equency characterization

The 3 x 3 G(s) matrix

‘(S)=[:W1
can now be calculated from (14):
(20)

[4]
of switched de-de convertetx”, 17ZEE Trans. Aero.
vol. 9. no. 3, pp. 376–385, May 1973
RD. Middlebrook
ling switching-converter
and S. Cuk, “A general unified
power stages”, Power Electronics
and Elec. Systems,

approach to model-
Speclahsts
Corf, Cleveland OH, June 1976, pp. 18–34
-t := evalm(mverse( &*() + Hmat &* Kraat) &* Jinat) ;
[5] AS. Kklowski, R. Redl and N.O. Sokal, Dynannc Analyszs of
The resulting (extremely large) expression may be simplified Swltchmg-Mode DC/DC Converters, New York: Van Nostrand Rein-
hol~ 1991
by substituting numerical values for the parameters. Inverse
[6] V. Vorperian, “Simplified analysis of PWM converters using model of
Laplace transformation can be used to find the response to PWM switch”, 2 parts, IEEE Trans. Aero. and Elec. Systems, vol. 26,
steps and other fhnctions, or the matrix may be evaluated in no. 3, pp. 490–505, May 1990
the frequeney domain by setting s = jm. Fig. 7 shows the [7] PT. Krein, J. Bentsman, R,M. Bass and B.L. Lesieutre, “On the use of
dynamic line regulation of the two semi-converters, in open averaging for the analysis of power electronic systems”, IEEE Trans. on
Power Electromcs, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 182–190, Apr. 1990
loop and closed loop with K] = 5, Kz = –50. (No evaluation
[8] B, Lehman and R,M. Bass, “Switching frequency dependent averaged
of stability was made, but in practice this must be done.)
models for PWM DC-DC converters”, IEEE Trans. on Power Electron.
To see the effect of intlnite dc loop gain (e.g. by including /es, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 89–98, Jan. 1996

ideal integrators in the controller), s was set to zero and the [9] J. Sun and H. Grotstollen, “A symbolic computation package for aver-
aged analysis of power electronic systems”, Applied Power Electromcs
limit taken as K, -+ m, K2 -+ -m. The new value of G is
Conjf, San Jose, CA Mar. 1996, vol. 1, pp. 96-102
[10] J. Van de Vegte, Feedback control systems, 2nd edition, Englewood
–0.0306 –0,4286 -0.4286 Cliffs, NJ Prentice–Hall, 1990
G(0) = O 0 0 (21) [11] O.P Mandhana and R,G. Heft, “Two-port characterization of dc to dc
o 0 0 resonant converters”, Apphed Power Electromcs Corf, Los Angeles,
[ 1 CA Mar. 1990, 737–745
which may be compared with the equivalent open loop ma- [12] B. W. Char etal., First Leaves: A Tutorial Introduction to Maple V,
trix, J(0). The inlinite loop gain has made the input conduc- New York: Springer-Verlag, 1992

tance negative, g,, = –30.6mS. The reverse current gains are [13] J. Sebastiaq J. Uceda, M. Rico, M.A. Perez and F. Aldana, “A complete
study of the double forward- flyback converter”, Power Electromcs
now both -0.4286. The line, load and cross regulation are Speczaksts Conf, Kyoto, June 1988, vol. 1. pp. 142-149
perfect, as shown by the zeroes in rows 2 and 3.

0-7803-3843-X/97/$10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE